Performance problems

[tortuosit 486]

It seems so OP. Community alpha was supposed to make the release better but out of all 4 games in the series this is going to be the worst release by far.

MP performance issues, still tons of bugs, stability issues, huge chunks of content missing and possibly never making it back into the game.

So why do you still play ArmA games and spam forums with all your grief and despair? Go gardening. Will happily receive a warning.

[-ghost-tf 12]

Sigh.. There are alot of people with PCs way better then the recommended requirements, that still experience this stuttering and performance problems in multiplayer. This is a problem with the engines optimization not the PCs themself (ofcourse there are people that just need to upgrade their pc). But only because you dont experience these performance issues doesnt give you the right to insult people that do have performance issues.

[bad benson 1733]

sure people may tell me to play on a very optimised map..but that is not the point, i want to join in every user created map and play it, to have fun in it..not be stuck with a few maps that is optimised.

i totally agree that public MP is pretty much a disaster still. but this part i can't sign. are you expecting them to lock down the engine more so people can't use script commands in a bad way anymore? seriously. how could this even work?

i was on one or two servers that actually ran well so far. and i would've had a huge amount of fun on "battle for Kavala" if the stuttering wouldn't make PvP impossible. but in general you have to distinguish between low FPS and bad server performance. if the server and the mission is good this CAN actually work well BUT there are still universial problems that still make even that problematic. so yea it's kinda bad but not as bad as you might think. we'll see...

[AlphaCentauri 10]

No offence, but is OP new to the ARMA franchise? I remember both ARMA 1 and ARMA 2 being broken on launch, but it didn't seem like much of an issue back then. Shouldn't really be now either, should it? The game's already in better shape than the predecessors where, and it's not even out of beta yet.

[dale0404 5]

Hi Alpha,

The OP has stated that he has followed and played the franchise since Arma 1. As we all know the MP needs some loving, especially the big maps with + 40 players on there. And that is no disrespect to the server hosters.

[AlphaCentauri 10]

Hi Alpha,

The OP has stated that he has followed and played the franchise since Arma 1. As we all know the MP needs some loving, especially the big maps with + 40 players on there. And that is no disrespect to the server hosters.

A'iight, I admit I only read the title and skimmed through the post.

..and I find that the MP runs fine as long as the mission's optimized properly and the host's internet is good, just like was the case with ARMA 2.

[starky396 1]

Might I remind people that Altis came on the dev branch. The dev branch is not guaranteed to be stable nor will it be fully functioning.

[Maio 293]

isnt it not possible to make it more fluid for clients to host theyr own missions? without getting the lag problems all the time? there will not be many dedicatet servers for sure, and if there are. i bet all of them will host the same maps, meaning wasteland, invade og annex over and over. will there be any fixes for this in the features since it was never fixed in any previous arma series?

Focus on this question guys :)

[Qosmius 10]

No offence, but is OP new to the ARMA franchise? I remember both ARMA 1 and ARMA 2 being broken on launch, but it didn't seem like much of an issue back then. Shouldn't really be now either, should it? The game's already in better shape than the predecessors where, and it's not even out of beta yet.

so you actually vote up for a broken game at release? sure i can make up some rubbish to and release it for you if you want broken games

---------- Post added at 15:49 ---------- Previous post was at 15:46 ----------

if they just made it so that everyone could be able to host maps of theyr likings without having the massive stuttering if more than 2 or 3 peoples would decide to join your specific server. if that enables some restriction of bad codes, wouldnt it then be better that all the maps made are fluid and perfect rather than 1 out of 10 maps works nicely.

other titles such as bf3 and cod has premade maps with optimised scripts..cannot bis do the same? or give us quality tested codes

[bad benson 1733]

wouldnt it then be better that all the maps made are fluid and perfect rather than 1 out of 10 maps works nicely.

other titles such as bf3 and cod has premade maps with optimised scripts..cannot bis do the same? or give us quality tested codes

well people could also just stop hosting "shit" missions on "shit" servers. but yea. arma isn't an FPS with "maps", deal with it. there are always playable "modes" but every hoster has the freedom to host what he/she wants. what i agree on is that BI should release some good basic game modes that actually work well on the large scale. it's time to step up and deliver some polished stuff as a benchmark. simple bf like capture modes like "battle for Kavala" and something like domination and also insurgency.

those concepts have been proven to be good and it's time they acknowledge that and deliver something themselves. that way there would be at least some main stuff that would be "guaranteed" to work as intended.

[clydefrog 3]

well people could also just stop hosting "shit" missions on "shit" servers. but yea. arma isn't an FPS with "maps", deal with it. there are always playable "modes" but every hoster has the freedom to host what he/she wants. what i agree on is that BI should release some good basic game modes that actually work well on the large scale. it's time to step up and deliver some polished stuff as a benchmark. simple bf like capture modes like "battle for Kavala" and something like domination and also insurgency.

those concepts have been proven to be good and it's time they acknowledge that and deliver something themselves. that way there would be at least some main stuff that would be "guaranteed" to work as intended.

They should definitely do that, I'm sure it would be a better use of their time than making loads of showcases and target practice missions.

[spanishsurfer 58]

I play exclusively on Multiplayer and have ZERO issues with lag. My rig is 2 years old and I run the game on a mixed bag of high/ultra. I have no idea why so many people have issues.

[clydefrog 3]

I play exclusively on Multiplayer and have ZERO issues with lag. My rig is 2 years old and I run the game on a mixed bag of high/ultra. I have no idea why so many people have issues.

you don't get any frame rate drops at all on multiplayer?

[tortuosit 486]

So why do you still play ArmA games and spam forums with all your grief and despair? Go gardening. Will happily receive a warning.

OK, received my well deserved warning :) - Anyway, please accept my apologies, @metalcraze. I was in the wrong mood while posting. I disagree with you sometimes but that was not fair.

[scrim 1]

I play exclusively on Multiplayer and have ZERO issues with lag. My rig is 2 years old and I run the game on a mixed bag of high/ultra. I have no idea why so many people have issues.

Neither do I. I've got a pretty neat computer, and it ran A3 like a dream when the Alpha was released (Alpha, as in the stage in which they said they'd be done with things like software or whatever, and thus performance. BS.), but then they went ahead and did something in the Beta that completely broke the game, to the point where just holding down a key on the keyboard for ~3 seconds causes absolutely everything to freeze for at least 10 seconds. It sure can't have anything to do with my computer, since it runs A2, and a number of other games without any problems. If it persists into after release, I won't have any other option that try to get a refund, because the game simply isn't working at all, due to them doing things that they should've been done with when going away from the Alpha stage.

Shit pisses me off to no end right now, since the game seems to be great in most other aspects.

[.kju 3244]

Vote: Give modders the tools to identify and avoid/solve performance bottlenecks

[dav 22]

'' Will bohemia ship a broken game? ''

No because the game is sweet!

[CaptainObvious 95]

Neither do I. I've got a pretty neat computer, and it ran A3 like a dream when the Alpha was released (Alpha, as in the stage in which they said they'd be done with things like software or whatever, and thus performance. BS.), but then they went ahead and did something in the Beta that completely broke the game, to the point where just holding down a key on the keyboard for ~3 seconds causes absolutely everything to freeze for at least 10 seconds. It sure can't have anything to do with my computer, since it runs A2, and a number of other games without any problems. If it persists into after release, I won't have any other option that try to get a refund, because the game simply isn't working at all, due to them doing things that they should've been done with when going away from the Alpha stage.

It might still be a problem at your end, I have experienced nothing but increased performance over time, and reading these forums almost everyone else has too.

Are you using stable or dev. branch btw? If dev, might be a good idea to check how fragmented your hdd is, if you're using a hdd of course.

Edited August 30, 2013 by CaptainObvious
added info

[bars91 956]

I too have experienced MP problems since Beta stage kicked in.

Alpha was pretty playable(sometimes got some stutter here and there) but since Beta it's kinda shit.

Editor and SP content(even some community SP missions) are running pretty good if not perfect.

[scrim 1]

It might still be a problem at your end, I have experienced nothing but increased performance over time, and reading these forums almost everyone else has too.

Are you using stable or dev. branch btw? If dev, might be a good idea to check how fragmented your hdd is, if you're using a hdd of course.

I've tried using both, doesn't make a difference.

[jw custom 56]

I can definitely feel the difference performance wise playing locally vs mp and wonder how that working :confused:

I mean i can understand desync if my connection or the server is fighting and things are "rubber banding" etc. but why is my general performance decreased :confused:

I wanna mention that i play and enjoy mp just fine, just with lowered performance.

[Blue1 10]

If you want to try a nearly perfectly optimized (in Scripts and Serverside) MP Mode, see my Signature and join one of my Servers (Try DEV / Altis with 96 Players running smooth and silky for that *WOOHOOO-effect*).

I am pretty sure, or lets say, 90% of all players that came there said: "here i have the best MP-Performance ever" - so if you want to use it like a "Benchmark" of what is possible.

Gimme some Feedback here - and don't forget, just released it yesterday and more features/optimization/ balancing will come ASAP.

cya & best regards,

Blue1

[icewindo 29]

I too have experienced MP problems since Beta stage kicked in.

Alpha was pretty playable(sometimes got some stutter here and there) but since Beta it's kinda shit.

Editor and SP content(even some community SP missions) are running pretty good if not perfect.

I actually have the same problem and I'm somewhat disappointed. Loading times are even more awesome than in the Alpha (WTF - Altis loads up in 8 seconds) but MP is pretty "meh, meh...".

I joined several "Invade & Annex" aka. rebranded Domination servers yesterday and I had 15-25fps at 1600m VD. I don't feel like playing MP with such a bad performance.

All graphic details were at standard with 2x AA and disabled SSAO. SP and editor missions work fine.

My setup is not a 2000€ extreme gam0r system but it still packs a punch:

i5 2500k @ 4ghz

7950 HD

Intel 180 GB SSD (SATA3)

8 GB RAM

Win7 x64

Maybe its also bad mission design?

@blue1

Thanks, will try out your server.

Edited September 1, 2013 by Icewindo

[Yashamalu 10]

The lag you experience could be server-dependent. On some Wasteland servers I can get averagely 34 fps with 30 players online, and 25 fps with 40 players, but on some other servers 15-20 regardless of the player complement.

[fabio_chavez 103]

the game is almost shipped now, and i wouldnt have thought that BI would consequently miss to imply any meaningfull solution to the gamebreaking MP performance issue and to the ludicrously impractical and outdated server browser... speaking with all love for BI and Arma3 in general, it just makes me upset about it how BI statements are bordering dishonesty. besides dishonesty, are you really expecting people to wait for post release patches to provide playable framerates in multiplayer?

Edited September 1, 2013 by Fabio_Chavez